Conversation
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #147 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 76.73% 76.73%
=======================================
Files 41 41
Lines 1831 1831
=======================================
Hits 1405 1405
Misses 426 426 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Zeitsperre
left a comment
Zeitsperre
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it might be more convenient to use the docker/build-push-action workflows here.
.github/workflows/tests.yml
Outdated
| - name: Get Tag Version | ||
| id: version | ||
| shell: bash | ||
| run: | | ||
| if [[ "${GITHUB_REF}" == "refs/heads/master" ]]; then | ||
| echo "::set-output name=TAG_VERSION::latest" | ||
| else | ||
| echo "::set-output name=TAG_VERSION::${GITHUB_REF##*/}" | ||
| fi | ||
| - name: Login to DockerHub | ||
| uses: docker/login-action@v1 | ||
| with: | ||
| username: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_USERNAME }} | ||
| password: ${{ secrets.DOCKERHUB_TOKEN }} | ||
| - name: Build Docker | ||
| run: make APP_VERSION=${{ steps.version.outputs.TAG_VERSION }} docker-build | ||
| - name: Push to DockerHub | ||
| run: make APP_VERSION=${{ steps.version.outputs.TAG_VERSION }} docker-push |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have you come across this workflow example? https://github.com/docker/build-push-action/
No need to manually fetch and apply tags on build if you can parse it directly from the trigger:
tags: name/app:latest,name/app:${{ GITHUB_REF##*/ }}There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. I've used it somewhere else, but I don't recall where exactly.
I simply copied this one over from another repo and didn't want to take more time on it.
Can you commit on the branch? I don't mind using that approach instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Zeitsperre
Did you want to attempt adjusting the CI with that action? I do not have enough time to deal with this, so I will merge as-is otherwise since I will need it for another release for urllib3 security fix.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right. I can take a look at this tomorrow if you can wait until then. Sorry for the delay!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good. No problem. Thanks
Co-authored-by: Trevor James Smith <10819524+Zeitsperre@users.noreply.github.com>
…cker deployment job Signed-off-by: Trevor James Smith <10819524+Zeitsperre@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Trevor James Smith <10819524+Zeitsperre@users.noreply.github.com>
|
@fmigneault I think this is a "good enough" version. I'll see if I can open some more Pull Requests tomorrow to split things up a bit. We should also consider generating a token on DockerHub and setting up Trusted Publisher for PyPI. |
|
@Zeitsperre The publisher is created in PyPI. |
3 participants
Since DockerHub does not provide cloud build anymore for free tier, build it ourselves here and push it. For the recent https://github.com/bird-house/twitcher/releases/tag/v0.11.0, I pushed it manually (https://hub.docker.com/repository/docker/birdhouse/twitcher/tags/v0.11.0/sha256:4d88c6afc3011fe4960bf81584b16244954d15db99babb7fcd591f8768d1143f). This CI update should do the same once tagged or on master.
I've set up a token with CRIM user for now. Can be updated to a birdhouse-specific token as desired (I do not have access to birdhouse org tokens within DockerHub).